REPORT NO.

(1)
Chapter (2)
Summarized by / Me

Under Supervision /Prof.

1. Appropriateness. The arrangement of spaces, spans, ceiling heights, access, and traffic flow must complement the intended use. 2. Economy. The overall cost of the structure should not exceed the clients budget. 3. Structural adequacy. Structural adequacy involves two major aspects.

OBJECTIVES OF DESIGN :

(a) A structure must be strong enough to support all anticipated loadings safely. (b) A structure must not deflect, tilt, vibrate, or crack in a manner that impair its usefulness. 4. Maintainability. A structure should be designed so as to require a minimum amount of simple maintenance procedures.

LIMIT STATES AND THE DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE:

Limit States.The limit states for reinforced concrete structures can be divided into three groups: 1. Ultimate limit states. These involve a structural collapse of part or all of the structure. Such a limit state should have a very low probability of occurrence. The major ultimate limit states are as follows: (a) Loss of equilibrium of a part or all of the structure as a rigid body. (b) Rupture of critical parts of the structure, leading to partial or complete collapse. (c) Progressive collapse. In some structures, an overload on one member may cause that member to fail. causing them to fail one after another, until a major part of the structure collapsed. (d) Formation of a plastic mechanism. A mechanism is formed when the reinforcement yields to form plastic hinges at enough sections to make the structure unstable. (e) Instability due to deformations of the structure. (f) Fatigue. Fracture of members due to repeated stress cycles of service loads may cause collapse. Serviceability limit states. These involve disruption of the functional use of the structure, but not collapse per se. Because there is less danger of loss of life, a higher probability of occurrence can generally be tolerated than in the case of an ultimate limit state. The major serviceability limit states include the following: (a) Excessive deflections (b) Excessive crack widths. (c) Undesirable vibrations.
2.

3. Special limit states. This class of limit states involves damage or failure due to abnormal conditions or abnormal loadings and includes: (a) collapse in extreme earthquakes. (b) structural effects of fire, explosions. (c) structural effects of deterioration. (d) long-term physical or chemical instability.

Limit-States Design

Limit-states design is a process that involves 1. the identification of all potential modes of failure. 2. the determination of acceptable levels of safety against occurrence of each limit state. 3. structural design for the significant limit states.

Basic Design Relationship

Figure shows a beam that supports its own dead weight, w, plus some applied loads, and These cause bending. The compressive and tensile stress blocks can be replaced by forces C and T .This resulting couble is called internal resisting moment ,The internal resisting moment when the cross section fails is referred to as the moment strength or moment resistance. The beam will support the loads safely if, at every section, the resistance of the member exceeds the effects of the loads: Resistances load effects To allow for the possibility that the resistances will be less than computed or the load effects larger than computed, strength-reduction factors, , less than 1, and load factors, greater than 1, are introduced:

Rn 1S1 + 2S2 + . . . . Here, Rn stands for nominal resistance (strength) and Sn stands for load effects based on the specified loads. V Vn D VD + LVL + . . . . M Mn D M D + L ML + . . . where Mn is the nominal moment strength. and MD & ML are the bending moments (load effects) due to the specified dead load and specified live load, respectively; M is a strength-reduction factor for moment; and D and L are load factors for dead and live load, respectively. Similar equations can be written for shear, V, and axial force, P:

STRUCTURAL SAFETY :

1. Variability in strength. The actual strengths (resistances) structural members will almost always differ from the values calculated by the designer. The main reasons for this are: (a) variability of the strengths of concrete and reinforcement. (b) differences between the as-built dimensions and those shown on the structural drawings. (c) effects of simplifying assumptions made in deriving the equations for member strength. 2. Variability in loadings. 3. Consequences of failure. A number of subjective factors must be considered in determining an acceptable level of safety for a particular class of structure. (a) The potential loss of lifeit may be desirable to have a higher factor of safety for an auditorium than for a storage building.

(b) The cost to society in lost time, due to a failure. (c) The type of failure, warning of failure, and existence of alternative load paths. This may not be possible if a member fails suddenly without warning. (d) The direct cost of clearing the debris and replacing the structure and its contents.